One might also consider placing the algorithm in the context of a generative adversarial network (GAN) to adapt the tile probability modeling ML component towards a pattern that is less distinguishable from a real city.
116 karma · joined December 29, 2011
One might also consider placing the algorithm in the context of a generative adversarial network (GAN) to adapt the tile probability modeling ML component towards a pattern that is less distinguishable from a real city.
I think catharsis is really important and people should teach themselves to seek it the way they seek their professional goals, food and companionship.
(Granted, often times aggregations are happening after some filtering, at which point the relation being aggregated might be considerably smaller than exabyte scale.)
We imagine a future where AI becomes a dominant paradigm for "writing" software -- I think that will be the case, but not in the way everyone suspects. I think 80% of the new value of software in the future will be derived from AI components, but that 80% of the production costs will still go into the structural glue code that supports the value-powerhouse models. Thus, most of the software written in the future will look similar to most of the code written today.
I also suspect that as the complexity of AI models increases, the structural code required to support these models will keep pace in complexity. For this reason, I see a future where the unit cost of high-quality software does not see any big drop, but where the value of this software continues to increase exponentially. A corollary to this is that valuable software will be no easier to program in the future than it is today.
As you referenced in your footnote, this goal is a little like the goal of putting a man on the moon, if the year is 1900. One could the make the case that something resembling an AGI agent would be needed to design/manage a merchant website with any degree of introspection and customizability. Your machine would need to understand business objectives, UI patterns, aesthetics, etc before taking the helm, and these things take years to learn even for even humans. This is not to say that AGI isn't an admirable goal, but that it's an obvious one, just as I imagine reaching the moon was in the centuries leading up to 1969.
Scientific research is certainly a massively parallel effort, pushing the boundary of our knowledge in many different direction at once, but rest assured that there are many good men and women working in this specific direction.
(also know that I have a lot of respect for this kind of vision-oriented thinking, especially because it generally leaves the writer vulnerable to criticism like this)
https://robots.thoughtbot.com/seamlessly-navigate-vim-and-tm...
In some of the cases described in this article, it sounds like these execs are addicted to the exercise that they wake up so early for (granted not a bad habit). But addiction by its nature tends to invent a narrative for its existence and the promise of greater productivity is gold.
I have that feeling whenever I commend _anyone_ for planning to learn to code. I don't know the specifics of this case, and whether the author would have been unreservedly gung ho about a guy talking about his plans to learn to code, but under the impulse to have faith in my empathetic capabilities, I generally resist the author's thought process as a kind of self-indulgent false modesty, rather than true insight. This might sound like a kind of "I'm not racist, I'm xenophobic" reasoning, but as a lot of people on this forum believe: learning to code is really hard and we shouldn't be so hard on ourselves when we are skeptical of others' abilities to learn how to do it.